California Fire Hydrant Repairs

Falsification of Evolution According to the Roman Catholic Church

There is no concrete fossil evidence that lends credence to the image of the man-monkey, 'ceaselessly touted by the media and evolutionist academic circles. Brush in hand, evolutionists produce imaginary creatures, and the fact that these drawings do not fit with the fossils, however, is a serious problem for them. An interesting method to overcome this problem, 'the production of fossil fuels that can not be found. The Piltdown Man, the more than biggest scandal in the history of science, 'a typical example of this method.

The Piltdown Man, a mandible of orang-utan and a human skull

A well-known doctor and amateur paleoanthropologist, Charles Dawson, in 1912 claimed to have discovered a jawbone and a skull fragment in a pit at Piltdown , England. Although the mandible was very similar to that of an ape, the teeth and skulls were human. These samples were classified as "Piltdown Man". Having asserted that dated back to five hundred thousand years ago, they were doomed, in several museums, such as absolute proof of human evolution. For more than forty years were written many scientific articles devoted to this discovery and many interpretations and drawings were produced, while the fossil was presented as important evidence that supports the theory of evolution. Were compiled no less than five hundred doctoral dissertations on the subject. Famous American paleoanthropologist Henry Fairfield Osborn said during a visit to the British Museum in 1935: "... we must be reminded that nature is full of paradoxes and this is an amazing discovery about the first humans ..." 1

STORY mockery The fossils unearthed by Charles Dawson and Sir Arthur Smith Woodward handled The pieces are reconstructed to form the famous skull. Parties diteschio human Jaw of Orangutang Based on the reconstructed skull, numerous drawings and sculptures are made and written numerous articles. The original skull is exposed to the British Museum. past 40 years since its discovery, the fossil of Piltdown reveals a hoax created by a group of researchers.  

Nel 1949, Kenneth Oakley, del dipartimento di paleontologia del British Museum, tentò di applicare il metodo del "test del fluoro", un nuovo sistema per determinare la data di alcuni fossili antichi, sui campioni dell'Uomo di Piltdown. Il risultato fu sbalorditivo. Durante il test si scoprì che l'osso mascellare non conteneva alcuna traccia di fluoro. Questo significava che era rimasto sepolto non più di pochi anni. Il cranio, che rivelava soltanto a small amount of fluorine, proved to be traced back to a few thousand years ago, as confirmed by recent studies.

It was determined that the teeth in the jawbone, belonging to an orang-utan had been worn down artificially, while the instruments "primitive" discovered with the fossils were simple imitations sharpened iron utensils. 2 With the detailed analysis completed by Weiner in 1953, was revealed to the public this fraud. The skull belonged to a man who lived five hundred years before, while the jaw bone a monkey died recently! The teeth were then arranged in order and added to the jaw so as to mimic those of humans. All these pieces were then treated with potassium dichromate to give an appearance of old age. These spots began to dissolve in contact with the acid. Le Gros Clark, who was part of the team that discovered the fraud, could not hide his amazement and said, " evidence of artificial abrasion immediately sprang to the eyes . Indeed, it seemed so obvious that one could ask why they were not been discovered before. " 3 aftermath, Piltdown Man was quickly removed from the British Museum, where he had been exposed for more than forty years.

The Man from Nebraska: a tooth Pork

In 1922, Henry Fairfield Osborn, director of the American Museum of Natural History, said he found a fossil molar tooth in western Nebraska near Snake Brooks, dating from the Pliocene. This tooth allegedly had the common characteristics of 'man and monkey. This was the subject of deep scientific discussions in quali alcuni sostenevano che si trattasse di un dente di Pithecanthropus erectus, mentre altri affermavano che si approssimasse di più a quello di un essere umano. Il fossile, che sollevò estesi dibattiti, venne detto "Uomo del Nebraska". Gli fu anche affibbiato un "nome scientifico": Hesperopithecus haroldcooki.

Molte autorità diedero il loro sostegno a Osborn. Sulla base di questo singolo dente vennero eseguite ricostruzioni della testa e del corpo dell'Uomo del Nebraska , il quale venne addirittura raffigurato insieme alla moglie e ai figli, come un'intera famiglia nella sua cornice naturale.

Tutti questi scenari si svilupparono da un solo dente. I circoli evoluzionisti avvalorarono a tal punto questo "uomo fantasma" che, allorquando un ricercatore di nome William Bryan si oppose alla tendenziosa decisione di basarsi su un singolo dente, fu aspramente criticato.Nel 1927 vennero scoperte altre parti dello scheletro. I nuovi reperti rivelarono che il dente non apparteneva né a un uomo né a una scimmia, bensì ad una specie estinta di maiale selvatico americano detto prosthennops. William Gregory intitolò un suo articolo, pubblicato sulla rivista Science , dove annunciava l'errore: "Hesperopithecus: in realtà né una scimmia né un uomo". 4 Ne seguì che tutte le rappresentazioni dell'Hesperopithecus haroldcooki e della "sua famiglia" furono repentinamente rimosse da tutta la letteratura evoluzionista.

L'illustrazione a sinistra, pubblicata sull'Illustrated London News del 24 luglio 1922, venne fatta sulla base di un singolo dente. Gli evoluzionisti, tuttavia, furono molto delusi quando fu rivelato che questo dente non apparteneva né a una creatura simile a una scimmia né a un uomo, ma bensì ad una specie estinta di maiale.

Ota Benga: l'Africano in gabbia

Dopo aver avanzato, ne L'origine dell'uomo, l'idea che l'uomo fosse evoluto da un essere vivente simile alla scimmia, Darwin si dedicò alla ricerca dei fossili che convalidassero la veridicità delle sue asserzioni. Alcuni evoluzionisti, tuttavia, credettero che tali creature si potessero trovare non solo nei fossili, ma, ancora viventi, in varie parti del mondo. Agli inizi del XX secolo, le ricerche degli " anelli transitional living "led to the unfortunate incident, the cruelest of which is that of the pygmy Ota Benga.

Ota Benga: The Pygmy in the zoo."

Ota Benga was captured in 1904 by an evolutionist researcher in the Congo. In his language, his name means "friend." He had a wife and two children. Chained and caged like an animal, was taken in the U.S., where a few scientists expounded the public at the World Exhibition in St. Louis, together some species of monkeys. It was presented as "the bond transitional closer to man." Two years later, he was transferred to the Bronx Zoo in New York, where he performed as one of "the most ancient ancestors of man" in the company of chimpanzees, a gorilla named Dinah, and an orang-utan Dohung said. Dr. William T. Hornaday, the zoo's evolutionist director, expressed pride in long speeches to host this exceptional "transitional form" in his zoo Ota Benga and treated like a common animal in a cage. Unable to endure more than the treatment they had undergone, Ota Benga eventually committed suicide. 5

The Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Ota Benga ... These scandals demonstrate that evolutionist scientists have not hesitated to use any kind of anti-scientific methods to prove their theory. Of this we have to remember, when we consider the other so-called evidence of the myth of human evolution. There is in fact an army of volunteers ready to do anything to ascertain the veracity of these fictitious stories.

Source: HarunYahya

What Does The Inside Of A Woman Look Like

man is descended from brutes, according to the Bible

Popish Doctrine

Pius XII (1939-1958) in the encyclical Humani Generis (1950) stated the following: 'The Magisterium of the Church does not forbid that, in accordance with the current state of science and theology, and subject of research and discussion by the competent in both fields, the doctrine of evolution, inasmuch as it does research on the origin of the human body, which would come from existing organic matter (the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God) '. As you can see in this encyclical, the evolution was not at all ordered, but was implicitly admitted even as a hypothesis and with caution. The fact that the theologians were encouraged to do research and discuss it certainly showed some sympathy with the Catholic Church to the theory of evolution. It's been almost fifty years since that encyclical, how are things today? They are the Roman Catholic Church teaches that human evolution that man comes from or inferior to brutes. But it is a development that excludes the creative act of God but a development requires the establishment. Here's what it said Pope John Paul II in a Symposium on Theory of Evolution and Christian Faith: 'right faith in creation and a teaching properly understood evolution does not create any obstacles (...) The trend in fact requires the establishment, the creation stands in the light of evolution as an event that extends over time - as a creatio continua - in which God becomes visible to the believer as creator of heaven and earth '(L'Osservatore Romano April 27, 1985).

This trend is supported by the Roman church called anthropological evolutionism mitigated and differs radically anthropological evolutionism of Lamarck, Darwin and Haeckel and professed by many biologists, because it says that evolution is restricted only at the origin the human body (as the soul is created directly by God), while the radical claims that the evolution of man includes the soul. But in essence what it says this type of evolution supported by the Roman church? This, that God by a special intervention is root cause of the human body, but has used a brute like material and instrument. In other words, says Fiorenzo Facchini, 'man is the result, at the same time, biological evolution and competition of a particular creative act of God', because it has evolved from an inferior being created by God a Catholic scholar, to explain this concept, said: 'Do not descended from brutes, but to ascend them '. So after about half a century encyclical Humani Generis of Pius XII evolution is no longer a mere theory but a truth to be embraced with open arms that we should not cast doubt on here as of late John Paul II put an end to doubt: 'The encyclical Humani Generis considered the doctrine dell''evoluzionismo' serious hypothesis, worthy of research and a thorough discussion there as opposed (...) Today, nearly half a century after the publication of ' encyclical, new knowledge leads to consider the theory of evolution more than a hypothesis. It 'worth noting that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various disciplines of knowledge '(L'Osservatore Romano, October 24, 1996).

Rebuttal

Man was made by God in His image and likeness, and therefore was never a brute
We are really disgusted to see how this church, which is said to Christian and claims to have in her teaching a ' infallible interpreter of Scripture, trying to reconcile scientific hypotheses with the Word of God puts them to give another meaning to the creation of man as it is described and taught by the Scriptures. This attitude Roman Catholic doctrine against this evil that is evolution is yet another demonstration of the contempt that it feeds into the Word of God Now for the destruction of these arguments that are raised against the knowledge of God in the book
Genesis it is written: "And the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul ... The Lord God took the man and put him in Garden of Eden to work it and keep it. And the Lord God gave us this commandment: you may freely eat of the fruit of all tree of the garden, but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, because on the day you eat thereof, thou shalt surely die ... And the Lord God had formed every beast of the earth and all fields the birds of heaven, the man took them to see what he would call, and that every living creature as the man who would give him. And the man called de 'names to all cattle, to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field .. "(Gen. 2:7,15-17,19,20).
Scripture is clear, the sixth day God made man from dust of the earth. It can not be true to in any way that man has evolved with the time of the brutes first created by God to become the being that we know today because in this case God would have formed the man from living matter from inorganic matter and not as the Scripture says. In other words, man can not be the result of biological evolution from living matter because the matter from which God took the man was not simple dust but organic matter (and in the back when the man dies according to which God said: "You shall eat bread by the sweat of your face until you return to the ground whence thou wast taken: for dust you are and to dust you shall return" [January 3:19]).

also be noted that even though gli animali della terra, e quindi anche tutte le specie di scimmie, furono anch’essi creati il sesto giorno l’uomo fu formato il sesto giorno con un atto creativo ben distinto; quindi la scimmia fu fatta scimmia, e l’uomo fu fatto uomo. A ciò aggiungiamo il fatto che Dio quando creò l’uomo disse: “Facciamo l’uomo a nostra immagine e a nostra somiglianza…” (Gen. 1:26); perché anche questo conferma che l’uomo non può in nessuna maniera derivare da un essere inferiore animale, perché appunto fu fatto ad immagine e somiglianza di Dio subito, all’istante. Non è quindi che prima Dio formò la scimmia e poi la fece evolvere, nel corso di non si sa quanti thousands or millions of years, until it becomes a man in his own image and likeness, no, God made man now in his image and likeness. And finally add that when God made man spoke, and then the man had the power to hear, and then took him to the animals so he called them by name that makes us understand that he was endowed with intelligence. This also rules out any form of evolution.

But let's get to heart of the matter because to deny that God created beings distinct from animals and a human being such as to what we know today, drawing it from the dust of the earth in a short time except in a few moments? Why should we want to say this 'creatio continua'? We believe that the reason why the Roman Catholic church has been open to the theory of evolution is because what is written in Genesis about the creation of man became suddenly, before the scientific research, too simple to be true, and open contrary to what scientists say about the origin of man, in stark contrast to that if he continued to teach a creation of man, which excluded any form of evolution would end by being declared contrary to human reason and science, and so on. So it has sought the compromise, which consists of one part in a denial part of evolution (that is what he is saying that the soul comes from the matter and has not been infused in man by God) and secondly in the statement that God created an inferior being, a brute, which over time did develop the human being, and all this ends coll'annullare the clear teaching of God's Word Yet another clear proof that when you try to please men rather than God, when you decide to implement this century, you end up with himself against the Word of God and therefore against God Take heed therefore to yourselves brothers so that you may not fall into the same error, cling to the Word of God Do not try to adapt the theories of men, but believe me even though it says the things that you seem to go against reason and against human logic.

Giacinto Butindaro

Source: Lanuovavia